P L D 2012 Lahore 110 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD ANWAR — Petitioner Versus NADIA NASREEN and others — Respondents
| Citation | P L D 2012 Lahore 110 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ANWAR — Petitioner Versus NADIA NASREEN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2012 Lahore 110 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 2012 Lahore 110 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2012 Lahore 110 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD ANWAR — Petitioner Versus NADIA NASREEN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Inam Rasool Deo for Petitioner.
- Ayaz Safdar Sindhu for Respondent No.1.
- 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 while rebutting this submission argued that due to hike in prices in respect of commodities of daily use, the courts below had rightly granted annual increase.
- 4. After hearing both the parties, this court does not agree with the submission of learned counsel for respondent No.1 for the simple reason that the annual increase in the payment of maintenance allowance has not been provided in any provisions of the West Pakistan Family Court Act, 1964. It is the legislature to take into consideration the growing prices of the articles whereafter the same could legislate the law for imposing annual increase in the payment of maintenance allowance, till then, the courts have no jurisdiction to impose or levy any increase upon the payment of maintenance allowance. The increase levied by the courts below upon the payment of maintenance allowance lacks statutory sanction as such, to this extent, the judgments of the courts below are liable to be set aside.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 5, Sched. & S.14
Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199
Constitutional petition
Suit for recovery of maintenance allowance
Family Court fixed maintenance allowance of plaintiff at the rate of Rs.1500 per month with annual increase of 15%
Said order of Family Court had been maintained by the Appellate Court
Defendant had alleged that courts below while imposing increase of 15% per annum upon payment of monthly maintenance allowance, had proceeded against the spirit of law
Held, annual increase in the payment of maintenance allowance not been provided in any provision of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 and it was for the legislature to take into consideration the growing prices of the articles, whereafter the same could legislate the law for imposing annual increase in the payment of maintenance allowance, till then, the courts had no jurisdiction to impose or levy any increase upon the payment of maintenance allowance
Increase levied by the courts below upon the payment of maintenance allowance lacked statutory sanction
Petition was partly allowed by modifying the judgment of Family Court to the extent of levy of 15% increase
Plaintiff would be entitled for the maintenance allowance of Rs.1500 per month without any increase
Order accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
SYED MUHAMMAD KAZIM RAZA SHAMSI, J.
Mst. Nadia Nasreen daughter of the present petitioner Muhammad Anwar on 13-12-2006 instituted a suit for recovery of maintenance allowance against her father alleging that she is 17 years of age and is entitled for the maintenance allowance from her father at the rate of Rs.5,000 per month. It was alleged that her father is a man of means and earns more than Rs.75,000 per month from the different sources, The suit was contested by Muhammad Anwar denying the allegation and the learned Judge Family Court vide judgment dated 11-3-2008 fixed the maintenance allowance of the minor daughter at the rate of Rs.1,500 per month with annual increase of 15%. In appeal, filed by the present petitioner, the order was maintained vide judgment dated 25-4-2008 passed by Mr. Pervaiz Ismail Joiya, learned Additional District Judge, Samundri, District Faisalabad.
2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the courts below while imposing increase of 15% per annum upon payment of monthly maintenance allowance have proceeded against the spirit of law as such, the increase in the payment of maintenance allowance is liable to be set aside.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 while rebutting this submission argued that due to hike in prices in respect of commodities of daily use, the courts below had rightly granted annual increase.
4. After hearing both the parties, this court does not agree with the submission of learned counsel for respondent No.1 for the simple reason that the annual increase in the payment of maintenance allowance has not been provided in any provisions of the West Pakistan Family Court Act, 1964. It is the legislature to take into consideration the growing prices of the articles whereafter the same could legislate the law for imposing annual increase in the payment of maintenance allowance, till then, the courts have no jurisdiction to impose or levy any increase upon the payment of maintenance allowance. The increase levied by the courts below upon the payment of maintenance allowance lacks statutory sanction as such, to this extent, the judgments of the courts below are liable to be set aside.
5. For the foregoing reasons, this petition is partly allowed by modifying the judgment of the learned trial court to the extent of levy of 15% increase. The respondent shall be entitled for the maintenance allowance of Rs.1500/- per month without any increase. H.B.T./M-313/L Order accordingly.